Central Administrative Tribunal - Lucknow
Satya Narain Srivastava vs Union Of India on 23 January, 2025
CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00508 of 2016 Satya Narain Srivastava & Ors. Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
LUCKNOW BENCH LUCKNOW
Original Application No.332/00508/2016
Dated, this 23rdday of January, 2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Ojha, Member-Judicial
Hon'ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative
1. Satya Narain Srivastava, aged about 60 years, Son of Late Udai
Shankar Srivastava, Resident of C-44, Butler Palace Colony, Lucknow.
2. Pramanshu, aged about 59 years, Son of Late Ram Hit, Resident of
120, Civil Lines, Bareilly, presently posted as Commissioner, Bareilly
Division, Bareilly.
3. Smt. Shraddha Mishra, aged about 59 years, wife of Dr. Rashmi
Kant Mishra, Resident of B-802, CSI towers, Vipin Khand, Gomti
Nagar, Lucknow, presently posted as Commissioner, Entertainment
Tax, Lucknow.
4. Chandrakant, aged about 59 years, Son of Late Prithvi Raj,
Resident of Commissioner's Residence, Agra, presently posted as -
Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra.
5. Surya Prakash Misra, aged about 59 years, Son of Late Ram Preet
Misra, Resident of -1/102, Viram Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow,
presently posted as -Commissioner, Faizabad Division, Faizabad.
6. Mani Prasad Mishra, aged about 59 years, Son of Sri Prabhu
Shankar Mishra, Resident of B-602, CSI Tower, Vipin Khand,
Lucknow, presently posted as Secretary, Home Department,
Government of U. P. Lucknow.
7. Pushya Pati Saxena, aged about 60 years, Son of Late Dr. K. N.
Saxena, Resident of 5/36, Sector-5, Rajendra Nagar, Sahibabad,
District Ghaziabad.
8. Anil Rajkumar, aged about 58 years, Son of Late Rajendra Kumar,
Resident of -B-148, Sector-50, Noida, District Gautam Buddha Nagar,
presently posted as -Additional Development Commissioner for
Handlooms, Ministry of Textiles, government of India, New Delhi.
9. Dr. Indra Vir Singh Yadav, aged about 60 years, Son of Late
Surendra Singh Yadav, Resident of -R-9/239 Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad.
10. Smt. Neelam Ahlavat, aged about 59 years, Daughter of Late Raja
Ram, Resident of C-8, Butler Palace Colony, Lucknow, presently
posted as Commissioner, Azamgarh Division, Azamgarh.
11. Sudhir Kumar Dixit, aged about 59 years, Son of Sri S. P. Dixit,
Resident of C-750, Mahanagar, Lucknow, presently posted as -
Commissioner Devi Patan Division, District Gonda.
12. Sandeep Kumar Sharma, aged about 60 years, Son of late Shanti
Sharma, Resident of 75-A, Balrampur House, District Allahabad
presently working as Member (Judicial) Board of Revenue, District
Allahabad.
Page 1 of 8
CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00508 of 2016 Satya Narain Srivastava & Ors. Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.
13. Ajay Kumar Upadhyaya, aged about 60 years, Son of Sri Durga
Prasad Upadhyay, Resident of 3/152, Vishal Khand, Gomti Nagar,
Lucknow.
14. Vijai Bahadur Singh, aged about 60 years, Son of Late Markandey
Singh, Resident of 3/157, Viraj Khand, Near Sahara Hospital Gate No.
3, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.
15. Murli Manohar Lal, aged about 56 years, Son of Sri Shyam Lal,
Resident of 1084-A Sector M, Ashiyana, Lucknow presently working as
Secretary-cum-Human Rights Commission, U. P./ Commissioner Food
Safety and Drug Administration at Lucknow.
16. Manoj Mishra, aged about 57 years, Son of Sri Anand Prakash
Mishra, Resident of 1/20, Virat Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow,
presently working as Secretary Agricultural Education and Research,
Government of U.P., Civil Secretariat Vidhan Bhawan, Lucknow.
17. Bharat Lal Rai, aged about 60 years, Son of Late Parasnath Rai,
Resident of 5/1194, Viram Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.
18. Shambhu Nath, aged about 58 years, Son of Sri Jeet Lal, Resident
of 3/329, Vishal Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow presently working as
District Magistrate at Etah.
19. Rakesh Kumar, aged about 59 years, Son of Late Shyam Kishore
Srivastava, Resident of 147, ELDECO Greens, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.
20. Narendra Kumar Singh, aged about 58 years, Son of Late Raj Pati
Singh, Resident of C-797, Sector-C Mahanagar, Lucknow presently
working as District Magistrate, Mainpuri.
21. Chandra Pal Singh, aged about 58 years, Son of Late Brij Bhanu
Singh, Resident of Village Rajpura, Tehsil Manikpur, District
Chitrakoot, presently posted as Secretary, Public Service Commission,
U. P. Allahabad.
22. Smt. Pushpa Singh, aged about 60 years, wife of Sri Ashok Kumar
Singh, Resident of 2/4, Dalibagh Colony, Lucknow presently working
as Managing Director, U. P. Bhumi Sudhar Nigam, Lucknow.
23. Rajiv Rautela, aged about 56 years, Son of Sri P. S. Rautela,
Resident of Flat No. 1202, Gomti Enclave, Tilak Marg. Dalibagh,
Lucknow, presently working as Secretary, Minor Irrigation
Department, Civil Secretariat, Vidhan Bhawan, Lucknow.
24. Shiv Shyam Mishra, aged about 59 years, Son of Sri J. S. Mishra,
Resident of 342, ELDECO Green, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.
25. Pramod Kumar Agrawal, aged about 59 years, Son of Sri Chhotey
Lal Agrawal, Resident of House No. 15, Sector 14 A, Noida, presently
working as ACEO, Noida Gautam Buddha Nagar.
26. Ajay Deep Singh, aged about 57 years, Son of Late Yashpal Singh,
Resident of 162, Vijay Nagar Colony, Kanpur Road, Lucknow,
presently working as Managing Director UPDESCO Lucknow.
27. Ram Vishal Mishra, aged about 58 years, Son of Late Ram Adhar
Mishra, Resident of A-602, CSI Tower, Vipin Khand, Gomti Nagar,
Lucknow, presently working as District Magistrate, Balrampur.
28. Dr. Alka Tandon Bhatnagar, aged about 58 years, wife of Sri P. K.
Bhatnagar, Resident of 1/595, Vaishali Ghaziabad, presently working
Page 2 of 8
CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00508 of 2016 Satya Narain Srivastava & Ors. Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.
as Special Secretary, Department of Horticulture & Food Processing,
Government of U. P., Civil Secretariat Vidhan Bhawan, Lucknow.
29. Rudra Pratap Singh aged about 59 years, Son of Sri Chhoteylal
Singh, Resident of B/3-102, ELDECO Elegance, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti
Nagar, Lucknow, presently working as Additional Commissioner U. P.
Avas and Vikas Parishad, Lucknow, Lucknow.
30. Sudhesh Kumar, aged about 57 years, Son of Late Ram Chandra
Ojha, Resident of C-39, Butler Palace Colony, Lucknow, presently
working as Director, Information & Public Relations Directorate,
Lucknow.
31. Arun Kumar Mishra, aged about 59 years, Son of Late Virendra
Nath Mishra, Resident of 5/72, Vishal Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow,
presently working as Special Secretary, Bal Vikas Evam Pushtahar
Department, Government of U. P., Civil Secretariat Vidhan Bhawan,
Lucknow.
32. Jai Prakash Singh, aged about 60 years, Son of Sri R. N. Singh,
Resident of 19/295, Indira Nagar, Lucknow.
33. Chandra Prakash Tripathi, aged about 57 years, Son of Sri Shyam
Narain Tripathi, Resident of E-103, Sector 52, Noida, District Gautam
Buddha Nagar, presently working as Special Secretary, Department of
Irrigation, Govt. of U. P., Civil Secretariat, Vidhan Bhawan, Lucknow.
34. Vireshwar Singh, aged about 59 years, Son of Sri Ram Kripal
Singh, Resident of K-1280 A, Ashiyana, Lucknow presently working as
District Magistrate Mahoba.
35. Ajay Kumar Singh, aged about 59 years, Son of Sri K. D. Singh,
Resident of 3/203, Vishal Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, presently
working as Director, Technical Education, Lucknow.
36. Hari Kant Tripathi, aged about 59 years, Son of Sri Ram Lautan
Tripathi, Resident of 1/182A, Vineet Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow,
presently working as Special Secretary, Housing and Urban Planning,
Government of U P., Civil Secretariat Vidhan Bhawan, Lucknow.
37. Sunil Kumar Srivastava, aged about 59 years, Son of Sri Ram
Chandra Srivastava, Resident of B3/95, Vishal Khand, Gomti Nagar,
Lucknow, presently working as Special Secretary, Social Welfare
Department, Government of U. P., Civil Secretariat Vidhan Bhawan,
Lucknow.
.....Applicants
By Advocate: Shri Shireesh Kumar
VERSUS
1. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Department of
Personnel and Training, Government of India, North Block, New
Delhi.
2. State of U.P. through the Chief Secretary, Government of U.P.
Civil Secretariat, Vidhan Bhawan, Lucknow.
3. The Principal Secretary, Appointment, Government of U.P. Civil
Secretariat, Vidhan Bhawan, Lucknow.
.....Respondents
Page 3 of 8
CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00508 of 2016 Satya Narain Srivastava & Ors. Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.
By Advocate: Smt. Prayagmati Gupta
Shri Shailendra Singh Rajwawat
ORDER (ORAL)
Per Hon'ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative In this case, the applicants have sought the following reliefs:
"(i) To direct the respondents to allow next to the highest pay scale of Rs.
67,000-79,000/- with all the consequential service benefits of pay fixation and arrears of salary etc to the applicants with effect from due dates when the applicants became entitled to this pay scale.
(ii) Any other order which is deemed just and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case be also passed in favour of the applicants in the interest of justice along with the cost of this original application."
2. The facts of the case are that the applicants were initially appointed in the UP Provincial Civil Service (UPPCS, hereafter) and allotted 1980, 1981 and 1982 batches. They were promoted to the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) vide notification dated 27.11.2012. Following their promotion to IAS, they submitted representation to the respondents for grant of higher pay scales available to UPPCS officers who were junior to them. Having failed to elicit a response, they have preferred this OA.
3.1 The applicants state that no formal order for their confirmation in the IAS has been issued and they still maintain their lien in the UPPCS according to rules 3 and 3A of the IAS (Probation) Rules, 1954. It is contended that in terms of the circular dated 11.02.1965 issued by respondent no. 1, the applicants are entitled to all service benefits as admissible to UPPCS despite their promotion to IAS. It is contended that they are working in pay band IV of Rs. 37,400 - 67,000/- with grade pay of Rs. 10,000/- and they are entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 67,000 - 79,000/-.
Page 4 of 8 CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00508 of 2016 Satya Narain Srivastava & Ors. Vs. U.O.I. & Ors. 3.2 It is stated by the applicants that their grievances have not been redressed despite constitution of a committee vide order dated 27.06.2016.
3.3 The applicants have cited the case of Gaya Prasad, an officer junior to them, who has been granted higher pay scales. 3.4 The applicants contend that an identical issue has been decided by this Tribunal in OA No. 257 of 2010 Rajesh Kumar Shrivastava vs Union of India & Ors vide judgment and order dated 25.02.2015 which was upheld by Hon'ble High Court on 04.08.2016 in Writ Petition No. 16174/SB/2016.
4.1 Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents no. 2 and 3. It is stated that as per rule 3 of the IAS (Pay) Rules, 2007, there are four pay scales - Junior Scale, Senior Scale, Super Time Scale, and Above Super Time Scale. Super Time Scale is in Pay Band IV of Rs. 37,400 - 67,000/- plus grade pay of Rs. 10,000/-. Above Super Time Scale includes HAG scale of Rs. 67,000 - 79,000/- (annual increment @ 3%). As per Notes 1 and 2 below the rule, Super Time Scale and Above Super Time Scale (HAG) are admissible after completion of 16 and 25 years of service, respectively, reckoned from the year of allotment. The applicants have been assigned 2001 batch and they have not completed 25 years of service required for Above Super Time Scale (HAG) yet. 4.2 It is stated by the respondents that in respect of the circular dated 31.10.1966 and regulation 10(4) of the IAS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulation, 1955 providing for entitlement of higher pay scale to probationary IAS officer promoted from State Civil Service, a committee was constituted by the Chief Secretary of State of UP vide order dated 27.06.2016 to consider the grievance of the applicants. The committee submitted its recommendations dated 20.02.2017 and Page 5 of 8 CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00508 of 2016 Satya Narain Srivastava & Ors. Vs. U.O.I. & Ors. guidance was sought on the matter by the State Government vide letter dated 06.10.2017 from the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT, hereafter), Government of India. Vide supplementary counter affidavit dated 21.05.2024, the respondents have stated that DoPT, vide its letter dated 09.05.2022 has advised as follows:
"However, in light of the provisions available during the 6th CPC i.e. in IAS (Pay) Rules, 2007, State Government may protect the enhanced pay of the said officers, subject to the maximum of Grade Pay attached to Selection Grade i.e. 8,700/- as provided in Para 1 pf Schedule I of IAS (Pay) Rules, 2007."
It is stated by respondents 2 and 3 that in view of the aforesaid guidance, the maximum selection grade pay i.e. Rs. 8,700/- can be protected in respect of the promotee officers from the State Civil Services to the IAS.
4.3 In regard to Gaya Prasad's case, it is stated that he was granted pay scale of Rs. 37,400 - 67,000/- with grade pay of Rs. 10,000/- on 03.08.2013 and scale of Rs. 67,000 - 79,000/- on 05.07.2014 and he was promoted to IAS cadre on 13.08.2014/28.07.2015. As such, Gaya Prasad was granted the pay in aforementioned scales before his promotion to IAS and the applicants cannot seek parity with him. 4.4 In regard to Rajesh Kumar Srivastava (supra), it is stated that he belonged to the Indian Police Service (IPS) and Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA, hereafter), Government of India issued letter dated 07.05.2008 in his favour when guidance was sought by the State Government. In the applicants' case, however, in the letter dated 09.05.2022, DoPT, Government of India has informed that the State Government may protect the salary of the officers subject to the maximum grade pay, i.e., Rs. 8,700/- in 6th Central Pay Commission as provided in the IAS (Pay) Rules, 2007. Further, the applicants, at the time of their appointment to IAS, have given consent in respect of termination of lien in the State Civil Services and, therefore, they Page 6 of 8 CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00508 of 2016 Satya Narain Srivastava & Ors. Vs. U.O.I. & Ors. cannot claim the benefit of the State Civil Services after termination of their lien.
5. We have heard both the parties. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the extant IAS rules being parimateria with the extant IPS rules and the facts and circumstances of the cases being similar, the benefit of Rajesh Kumar Srivastava (supra) should be extended to the applicants too. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed the plea, highlighting the averments made by the respondents.
6.1 It is not in dispute that the applicants were on probation in IAS after their promotion to that service when their junior in UPPCS, Gaya Prasad, was granted the benefit of highest scale (Rs. 67,000 - 79,000/-) in UPPCS.
6.2 It is noted that the grievances of the applicants were looked into by a committee constituted for the purpose and the State Government referred the matter to DoPT, Government of India. 6.3 A perusal of order dated 25.02.2015 in Rajesh Kumar Srivastava (supra) shows that the controversy therein was resolved in the following manner:
"8. It is clear from the submission of the impugned letter and the Counter Affidavit the letter from Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India dated
07.05.2008 was not taken into consideration. The letter is in reply to the guidance earlier sought by the State Govt. on the issue whether benefit of higher pay scale in the State Service may be extended to an officer selected and appointed to the IPS and who is on probation. The operative part of the letter dated 07.05.2008 reads as follows:
"As informed the State Government had created 15 posts in the DIG grade in the pay scale of Rs. 16,400 - 450 - 20,000 of the State Police Officers vide their order dated 27.02.2004. If Shri R K Srivastava was eligible to hold the newly created posts in DIG grade at that time, the notional benefit may be given to him for recalculation of his pay in the IPS in accordance with aforesaid rule."
9. In view of the facts and circumstances stated above the OA succeeds. The impugned order dated 15.20.2009 is hereby quashed. The Page 7 of 8 CAT, Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00508 of 2016 Satya Narain Srivastava & Ors. Vs. U.O.I. & Ors.
respondent nos. 2 and 3 are directed to hold the review DPC and consider the case of applicant for grant of benefit of pay scale of Rs. 16,400 - 450 - 20,000 in terms of G.O. dated 27.02.2004..."
(emphasis supplied) 6.4 The controversy in the instant case is similar to the one in Rajesh Kumar Srivastava (supra). In Rajesh Kumar Srivastava (supra), guidance from Government of India (MHA) was available to the State Government. In the instant case, as per the submission made by respondents 2 and 3, Government of India (DoPT), vide their letter dated 09.05.2022, has advised that the State Government may protect the enhanced pay of the said officers, subject to the maximum of the grade pay attached to the selection grade i.e. Rs. 8,700/- as provided in Para 1 of Schedule 1 of the IAS (Pay) Rules, 2007.
6.5 Be that as it may, the extant rules in the IPS and the IAS being parimateria, we see no reason why the benefit of Rajesh Kumar Srivastava (supra) should not be extended to the applicants as well in terms of protection of their pay vis a vis their junior, Gaya Prasad. 7.1 In view of the foregoing, this OA is disposed of with a direction to the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to grant the benefit of pay protection to the applicants from the date of grant of enhanced pay to their junior in UPPCS, Gaya Prasad, on the same analogy as in Rajesh Kumar Srivastava (supra) within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
7.2 Pending MAs, if any, are also disposed of.
7.3 The Parties shall bear their own cost.
(Pankaj Kumar) (Justice Anil Kumar Ojha)
Member (A) Member (J)
Vidya Ben Digitally signed by
Vidya Ben Waghela
Waghela 15:37:54 +05'30'
Date: 2025.01.27 Page 8 of 8